Michelle: Here’s a wild thought for you, Mark. Since 1840, the average human life expectancy has been increasing by about three months every single year. And there is absolutely no sign of that trend leveling off. Mark: Whoa. Three months a year? That adds up fast. So a child born today... what are we talking about? Michelle: We're talking about a 100-year life becoming the norm. Which leads to a much scarier question: what does a 100-year work life look like? Mark: A hundred-year work life? That sounds... exhausting. I mean, the whole model is you go to school, you work for 40 years, you get the gold watch, and you retire. How can that possibly stretch to 60, 70, or even 80 years of working? Our system isn't built for that. Michelle: Exactly. And that's the central premise of the book we're diving into today: Long-Life Learning: Preparing for Jobs That Don’t Even Exist Yet by Michelle R. Weise. She argues that our system is not just unprepared; it's fundamentally broken for this new reality. Mark: I’ve heard her name. She’s a big thinker in this space, right? Michelle: She is. And what's fascinating is that Weise comes from the school of thought of the legendary Clayton Christensen, the father of 'disruptive innovation.' So she's not just describing the problem; she's using this incredibly powerful framework to diagnose why it's happening and what we can do about it. The book was widely acclaimed when it came out, even winning a major award from the University Professional and Continuing Education Association for its contribution to the field. Mark: Okay, so if we're all going to be working for what feels like an eternity, what's so broken about the current system? Can't we just... keep doing what we're doing, but longer?

Michelle: Well, that’s the problem. The system is designed for a world that doesn't exist anymore. It's rigid, it's front-loaded, and it leaves millions of people behind. Weise tells this story that just perfectly captures the issue. It's about a single mother in 2018. She desperately needs to upgrade her skills to get a better-paying job to support her family, which includes her young child and aging parents. Mark: A classic, all-too-common scenario. So she looks into going back to school? Michelle: She tries. She explores community colleges, online courses, everything. But the class schedules are completely inflexible. They clash with her caregiving duties. The online options lack the support she needs to actually succeed. She's trapped. She has to choose between caring for her family and investing in her own future. Mark: That's heartbreaking. It’s not that she lacks the will or the passion to learn; the system is actively blocking her. It’s designed for an 18-year-old with no other responsibilities, not a working adult. Michelle: Precisely. And she's what the book calls a 'nonconsumer' of education. The traditional system isn't serving her, so her alternative is... nothing. She's stuck. And there are millions like her. Think of the high school graduate from the book who takes a job at a local pharmacy, promised growth and advancement. But the management turns over so frequently that none of those promises ever materialize. She's just stuck in a dead-end job. Mark: I see. So it’s not just a skills gap, it’s an opportunity gap. The system itself feels rigged against the average person trying to get ahead. Michelle: It is. And the data backs this up. After the 2008 financial crisis, the top 1 percent of the American labor market captured 85 percent of all the income growth. The system is designed to benefit those already at the top, while the pathways for everyone else are crumbling. The COVID-19 pandemic just threw a giant spotlight on all these cracks that were already there. Mark: Okay, so the system is failing the very people who need it most. But why? Why don't colleges and universities adapt? It seems like there's a huge, untapped market of people like that single mother. Why aren't they chasing it?

Michelle: That is the million-dollar question, and this is where Weise's connection to Clayton Christensen becomes so powerful. She uses his theory of disruptive innovation to explain it. It’s a concept he famously called "The Innovator's Dilemma." Mark: The Innovator's Dilemma. I’ve heard the term, but break it down for me. Michelle: Okay, the classic example is the American steel industry. For decades, it was dominated by massive, integrated steel mills. They were incredibly profitable and made high-quality steel for big customers like car manufacturers. Then, in the 1960s, these tiny new companies called 'mini-mills' appeared. Mark: Let me guess, the big guys laughed at them? Michelle: They did! The mini-mills used a new technology to make cheap, low-quality steel from scrap metal. Their only product was rebar—the bumpy metal rods used in concrete. The big steel mills looked at the tiny profit margins on rebar and said, "No, thank you. We'll stick with our high-end automotive steel." They were happy to cede the bottom of the market to the mini-mills. Mark: And that was a fatal mistake. Michelle: A huge one. Because the mini-mills got their foothold. They reinvested their profits, improved their technology, and slowly, decade by decade, they moved upmarket. They started making structural steel, then sheet steel, until eventually, they were competing directly with the big mills, but with a much lower cost structure. By the 1990s, most of those giant, 'successful' integrated mills were bankrupt. Mark: Wow. So it's not that the big companies were dumb, it's that their own success and focus on their best customers blinded them to the threat from below. Their business model forced them to make what seemed like a rational decision, but it ultimately killed them. Michelle: You've got it. That's the Innovator's Dilemma. And Weise argues this is exactly what's happening in higher education. Traditional universities are the integrated steel mills. They're chasing prestige, research grants, and high-paying, full-time residential students. They're in an amenities arms race—building fancier dorms and climbing walls. Mark: The 'Harvard envy' she talks about. Every college wants to be the one just above it on the rankings. Michelle: Exactly. And in that race, they are rationally ignoring the 'rebar' of the education market: the working adults, the single mothers, the people who need flexible, affordable, skills-focused training. So who steps in? Mark: The mini-mills. The online innovators. Michelle: Right. Schools like Southern New Hampshire University, Western Governors University, or BYU-Pathway. They started by serving the 'nonconsumers'—the people for whom the alternative was no college at all. Their product might not have the prestige of a traditional degree, but for their target audience, it's 'good enough.' And just like the mini-mills, they are getting better and better. Mark: That is a brilliant and slightly terrifying analogy. It means the very structure of success in higher education is what's preventing it from solving the problem for the people who need it most. Okay, so the system is rigged and the institutions are trapped. This is starting to sound pretty bleak. Is there any hope? What's the solution?

Michelle: There is hope, and the book offers a really powerful and elegant way to think about the solution. It’s an idea that comes from a completely different field: urban design. It's the story of the curb cut. Mark: The little ramp on the sidewalk corner? What does that have to do with education? Michelle: Everything. In the early 1970s, a group of activists in Berkeley, California, many of whom used wheelchairs, got fed up. The high curbs were like walls, making it impossible for them to navigate the city independently. So, in an act of defiance, they mixed some concrete in the middle of the night and created their own makeshift ramp. They literally 'cut the curb.' Mark: I love that. A little bit of civil disobedience. Michelle: It was! And that small act started a movement. Eventually, the Americans with Disabilities Act made curb cuts a legal requirement. But here’s the magical part. Who else uses curb cuts? Mark: Oh, wow. Everyone. Parents pushing strollers, delivery workers with dollies, travelers with wheeled luggage, kids on skateboards, runners... I've never even thought about it. Michelle: Exactly! A solution designed to solve a major barrier for a small, specific, and highly marginalized group ended up making life better for everybody. That's the core idea of universal design. And Weise argues this is precisely how we need to think about building a new learning ecosystem. Mark: I love that! So the idea is, if we design a new learning system that works for the single mom, the laid-off factory worker, the person who feels completely left out... it will actually create a better, more flexible system for all of us when we inevitably need to reskill in our own 100-year work lives. Michelle: That's the vision. We need to 'cut the curb' in education. Instead of building a system for the elite and hoping it trickles down, we build it for those facing the most friction. The book outlines five guiding principles for this new ecosystem. It needs to be Navigable, so people can see the pathways. Supportive, with things like childcare and coaching. Targeted, so the skills match real jobs. Integrated, so you can earn while you learn. And Transparent, so hiring is based on skills, not just pedigree. Mark: So those five principles are the blueprints for the new 'curb cuts' in learning. That makes so much sense. It reframes the whole problem from a deficit model—'what's wrong with these workers?'—to a design problem—'what's wrong with the system we've built?'

Michelle: It really does. It connects all the dots. We're facing this new reality of a 100-year work life, which is a massive challenge. Our existing systems, our 'integrated mills' of education, are failing to meet this challenge because of the predictable forces of disruptive innovation. They're not designed for it. Mark: But the solution isn't to just tear them down. It's to build something new alongside them, something designed for the people who are currently being left out. The 'curb cut' approach. Michelle: And in doing so, we create a more resilient, flexible, and human-centered system that will ultimately serve everyone better. Because at some point in a 60 or 80-year career, every single one of us will be that 'nontraditional' learner. We'll all need the on-ramp. We'll all need the support. We'll all need that curb cut. Mark: That's a powerful takeaway. It makes you wonder, in our own lives or workplaces, where are the 'curbs' we're not seeing? Who are we failing to design for, and what incredible, universal benefits are we missing out on because we haven't taken the time to 'cut the curb' for them? Michelle: A perfect question to leave our listeners with. We are all interconnected, and when we build pathways for those who have been left behind, we create a road forward for everyone. Mark: This is Aibrary, signing off.